3 ms·
Would it be better if Chrome said "There are 200,000 extensions on the Chrome store, each and every one of them deserves attention, we need to spend at least 30
by pineaux 6y ago
Would it be better if Chrome said "There are 200,000 extensions on the Chrome store, each and every one of them deserves attention, we need to spend at least 30 minutes looking at each one and composing a response, we have a ten-person team, we'll get back to you within 5 years?"
Yeah, but with 100 people it would take only a few months and after that it would take far less people to maintain everything. Also, they could just have their algorithm do the flagging and then have a team of 10/20 people to handle users. It's just that they don't care (enough) Not all 200.000 extensions are being killed in the next 14 days. Also if this is done for security reasons then put this responsibility with your security team and make that team bigger.
- kolinko 6y agoApple manages to do it somehow - when you get rejected, you can discuss the rejection reason if I remember correctly. Also, from 200k extensions probably most have less than five users, so they could prioritize those that have traction.
- creato 6y agoI see a lot of threads on HN discussing complaints about how locked down Apple is. I suspect many of the extensions that are problematic for Google never would have even been allowed into Apple's ecosystem in the first place. In general, Safari's extension system is more restricted than Chrome's, and changes that Chrome is attempting to make to be more similar to Safari's approach result in fierce backlash exactly like this thread (e.g. https://www.wired.com/story/google-chrome-ad-blockers-extensions-api/ https://www.wired.com/story/google-chrome-ad-blockers-extens...).
- SparklingCotton 6y agoWell of course they are using some sort of "lint" system and they know the reason. Why not give the information to the user? There is no need to use any manual labor here.